This is the ouput I´m getting using your approach:
n=896, failures=292
stcox var,tvc(var) texp((_t>1)_t)
rh
var HR 0.64, p=0.005, CI 0.47-0.87
t
var HR 1.01,p=0.001,CI 1.01-1.03
So as far as I understand this the interpretation is that the -var- is
protective within the first 24hrs, but detrimental afterwards ??
Would you say it is sufficient to use the graph to determine the
"break-point" (_t>1) or should this be done in a more analytical
fashion?
Regards,
M
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Maarten buis<[email protected]> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 31/8/09, moleps islon wrote:
>> However what I´m looking for is a way to find the exact
>> time analytically from where the curves are parallel. I
>> believe the PH assumption is fulfilled before and after
>> this point.
>
> You have to be more exact about what is being parallel.
> Usually it is just another way of saying that the PH
> assumption is violated.
>
> -- Maarten
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Maarten L. Buis
> Institut fuer Soziologie
> Universitaet Tuebingen
> Wilhelmstrasse 36
> 72074 Tuebingen
> Germany
>
> http://www.maartenbuis.nl
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
